Gearing a ranger

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How are these numbers calculated?

(2*damage + damage bonus) / delay

Dmg bonus at 60. 2h uses the lucy damage charts to calculate 2h bonus. From my understanding that's the commonly used method of comparison.

I noticed for 2handers, usually just checking the ratio between weapons will give you a very good indicator of where they stand against eachother.

For 1h mainhand, speed matters a lot due to damage bonus and ratios are mostly useless.

[Snaggles]

There are some edge cases. The Blam Stick at 30/40 due to raw ratio is about on par with a SBoZ unless the mob AC is very high.

BFG is another strange one. 20/50 but double damage, arrow damage, crits and disc. I figure just based on 8dmg silver arrows it’s about a 2.46 ratio before the disc.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(2*damage + damage bonus) / delay

Dmg bonus at 60. 2h uses the lucy damage charts to calculate 2h bonus. From my understanding that's the commonly used method of comparison.

I noticed for 2handers, usually just checking the ratio between weapons will give you a very good indicator of where they stand against eachother.

For 1h mainhand, speed matters a lot due to damage bonus and ratios are mostly useless.

Ah, I was mistakenly looking at the last column on the Lucy chart, but that's level 65 not 60. Now it makes sense. I agree with you that this is the right approach for getting ballpark ideas on comparing weapons.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You need to re-read my post, as you clearly didn't understand it.

It's been a few months since that discussion, so I'm revisiting your analysis and data and it looks like it's flawed from the very start. I'm using this post for the raw data: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=402, where you say:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

==========================
2h IFS parse on Giants.
==========================
16964 damage over 553 seconds = 30.68 DPS with fistweaving
15023 damage over 553 seconds = 27.5 DPS without fistweaving
207 punch swings / 297 crush swings = 70% dual wield chance.

==========================
1h Epic Fist + SoS Giant Parse
==========================
16712 damage over 552 seconds = 30.28 DPS
305 crush swings / 730 punch swings = 42% chance to dual wield.

==========================
2h IFS parse Corudoth
==========================
31414 damage over 553 seconds = 56.8 DPS with fistweaving
27455 damage over 553 seconds = 49.6 DPS without fistweaving

==========================
1h Epic + SoS Parse Corudoth
==========================
30819 damage over 553 seconds = 55.7 DPS

Given the data in the spoiler tags, I think you messed up the basic counts. For IFS on giants I get the same damage figures, but I count 123 punches and 183 crushes, not 207 and 297. Similarly on the 1h parse, I also calculate 16712 total damage, but 469 punches and 213 crushes, not 730 and 305.

Could you recheck your figures?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ah, I was mistakenly looking at the last column on the Lucy chart, but that's level 65 not 60. Now it makes sense. I agree with you that this is the right approach for getting ballpark ideas on comparing weapons.


It's been a few months since that discussion, so I'm revisiting your analysis and data and it looks like it's flawed from the very start. I'm using this post for the raw data: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=402, where you say:



Given the data in the spoiler tags, I think you messed up the basic counts. For IFS on giants I get the same damage figures, but I count 123 punches and 183 crushes, not 207 and 297. Similarly on the 1h parse, I also calculate 16712 total damage, but 469 punches and 213 crushes, not 730 and 305.

Could you recheck your figures?

I didn't include the misses in the logs to make it easier for people to double check the damage numbers. This is why I said "swings" instead of hits. My numbers include the misses.

I would advise you look at the post as a whole first, instead of fixating on trying to disprove specific details like this. You tend to do that a lot, and miss the forest for the trees. I don't mind constructive critisism, it helps hone my argument. But you have a bias towards me that tends to cloud your ability to read my posts, and it just wastes everybody's time.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't include the misses in the logs to make it easier for people to double check the damage numbers. This is why I said "swings" instead of hits. My numbers include the misses.

Great, that makes sense. I'm just trying to make sense of your math. With that addition then is my little spreadsheet an accurate summary of your raw data?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Great, that makes sense. I'm just trying to make sense of your math. With that addition then is my little spreadsheet an accurate summary of your raw data?

I'm not going to engage with you until you read the entire post first. I will not continue to enable your pattern of assuming everybody is wrong, and using any mistake you hope to find as justification for thinking this. You won't learn the game this way. You are supposedly good at math, read the post and think about it.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=440

[Snaggles]

Another classic derail in the works.

I’m so glad monks can’t play a race with FSI or this train would be speeding towards a ravine…

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Snaggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Another classic derail in the works.

I’m so glad monks can’t play a race with FSI or this train would be speeding towards a ravine…

Nonsense posts like this simply spam the thread. This doesn't hurt me or help you.

[Snaggles]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nonsense posts like this simply spam the thread. This doesn't hurt me or help you.

Oh laugh a little [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I’ve helped the thread quite a bit. For a nonsense poster I know quite a bit about this class.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Snaggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh laugh a little [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I’ve helped the thread quite a bit. For a nonsense poster I know quite a bit about this class.

You have been helpful! I didn't say your on-topic posts were bad. It was your off-topic posts that were bad[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]